Only 30 feet

The townspeople of Savoy are being asked to vote on an amendment to the Revised Zoning By-Laws permitting an increase in the height of the proposed wind turbines to 455 feet. They are also requesting that minimal ground clearance be reduced from 100 feet to 70 feet. These changes would add 60 additional feet to the diameter of the rotational sweep making these the largest onshore wind turbines anywhere in the state. The image above compares the 1.5 MWh turbines operating on Florida Mountain (currently the largest wind farm in Massachusetts) to turbines proposed in Savoy. When traveling west on route 2, the Hoosac Wind turbines, each taller than the Statue of Liberty, tower over Whitcomb Summit. Their blades have a rotational sweep of better than a full acre. Many see these turbines as disruptive to the iconic views that have been a Massachusetts hallmark for generations.

The five turbines proposed in Savoy would dwarf the 1.5 MWh units operated by Hoosac Wind Project. They would each have a rotational sweep of more than 2-2/3 acres! (Try to imagine that.) It’s fair to say that few people in this state have ever seen a turbine of this size. So large, in fact, that it’s difficult to comprehend the total impact of these enormous industrial power generators. If constructed they would completely alter the rural character of this town, subjecting a dozen homes to potentially harmful noise levels negitively affecting families that live within a mile and half of West Hill. Few people in Savoy will be unaffected by these massive Wind Turbines.

Large Wind Turbines make large noise. Larger Wind Turbines make larger noise.

The force that drives these enormous generators is massive and the sound emanating from the sweeping blades is egregious. The Minuteman Wind Project claims to have conducted a noise analysis many years ago, measuring Savoy’s “background noise” and factoring in noise modeling for the originally proposed turbines. The sketch they published (still available on line) suggests that no house would be vulnerable to sound levels above State approved guidlines… then stated simply: “Remote location alleviates noise concerns”. Subsequent to that study, the project has received a “Superseding Order of Conditions” from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection with exacting directives addressing wetland concerns and with rigorous conditions for compliance.

The locations of the Wind Turbines are fixed.

If the town votes to enlarge the size of the rotational sweep, the increased sound levels would be additive – extending the area of concern well beyond earlier estimates posing a definite health risk. Is the town of Savoy prepared to deal with health complaints caused by these enormous wind turbines?

Here is a composite depiction created by Stephen Ambrose. Stephen is a Board Certified Member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) with over 40-years’ experience. Since 2009, his career has focused on why there were very vocal negative reactions from neighbors living near industrial wind turbines.  He has visited many wind turbine sites, and even slept as a neighbor at Mars Hill, Fairhaven and Falmouth. Other sites visited include, Vinalhaven, Freedom, Maine and Kingston, Situate, Ipswich, Charlestown, Hull, Plymouth, Bourne, and Gloucester, Massachusetts. Professional experience and accurate measurements support neighbors complaining about excessive noise and adverse health situations. Unfortunately, these complaints are not acted upon by regulatory agencies and town boards.

His dipiction is placed on top of the original noise level study commissioned by Minuteman Wind [Epsilon cal #3, fig.2, 2009]. The yellow circles represent the [10 x diameter] CCC recomended distance from each turbine and includes the number of homes that fall directly within the area of concern. Note: This depiction is for the ORIGINALLY proposed Turbines with a 325′ diameter — NOT the 60′ addition — with a diameter of 385′!

No one can estimate the exact level of audible sound without a final design plan, exact locations, and the make and model of the Turbine.

No one.

The Cape Cod Commission in Massachusetts several years ago adopted 10 X, ten times the diameter of the wind turbines to residential homes after massive noise complaints from at least twenty one communities. Falmouth, Massachusetts is ground zero for poorly placed wind turbines in the United States taking health and property rights with no compensation. Falmouth has nine ongoing unresolved lawsuits over its wind turbines. The symptoms reported are: lack of sleep, fatigue, headaches, anxiety, insomnia, dizziness and irritability (aka human annoyance).

Many towns in Massachusetts have been fighting the insult of onshore wind turbines. The two 1.6 MWh turbines in the town of Falmouth were recently declared a nuisance by Superior Court and have ceased operation.

Another serious threat is inaudible Barometric Pressure Ossillations (Infra-Sound).

The blades of a turbine work like the wing of an airplane. Air passing over the curved surface creates low pressure resulting in LIFT, the same principle that enables an airplane to fly. When the blade passes by the tower, low pressure is sheared off abruptly eliminating lift. The blade jolts forward creating a sharp pulse that is “felt” but not heard. This Pressure Oscillation is responsible for motion-sickness and nausea in 1/3 of all people. If you have ever suffered from motion-sickness, you will probably be affected. Unlike audible sound, Barometric Pressure Ossilations travel great distance. Some have been detected miles from the turbine. Guidelines suggest that setbacks to avoid issues from Pressure Oscillations should be at least four times the set-back for audible sound.

What else can rural Savoy expect?

Hundreds of truckloads of heavy materials… excavators… cranes… explosives… materials and workers will drive up and down Upper Loop Road, Chapel Road, and Brier Road – day after day. All three roads will be widened and paved over. Powerlines will be upgraded and positioned out of the way for the delivery of the five giant Nacelles weighing hundreds of tons along with the enormous sections of the towers. More than 400 cement trucks will be needed for the the platforms alone.

A blade from the enlarged turbine is longer than the fuselage of a Boeing 787. Imagine the extensive re-design of Savoy’s rural roads to accommodate fifteen such blades! For residents, there will be endless days where Black Brook Road may be the only way out of town. The mature lilacs along the front of your property may have to go… along with your favorite apple tree, perennial hedges, livestock fencing, stone walls, and anything else that might impede the passage of the giant blades. There will be serious changes to rural Savoy. Minuteman Wind will be providing their own engineer to plan the clearing and excavation. It’s good to know that the planning board will oversee the operation, but let’s be clear, the ultimate goal is not the beautification of Savoy property, the goal will be getting blades that weigh up to 70 tons up to Harwood Road and West Hill.

“In towns south of Boston and west of Cape Cod, there are no plans for new onshore turbines, and one of Massachusetts’ leading wind experts said a lack of new activity across the state has led him to move away from studying onshore wind.

State government has also turned its focus elsewhere, as new energy legislation signed last year emphasized offshore wind and other renewable sources.”

— The Boston Globe, February 3, 2017

Crossroads in Savoy

The concerns of all residents must be aired and acknowledged. A hasty vote to increase the size of the largest wind turbines in the state, without a complete and credible sound test performed by a independent consultant and without full assurance of equitable compensation to the town, would be reckless. Dialog on these issues, for as long as it takes, is essential. If Savoy moves forward with these turbines without the support of it’s residents the town will never enjoy the unity and prosperity it seeks.

  • This is full of excellent information and should be broadcast all over Savoy and other threateed places. Thank you!   Trina Sears Sternstein
  • This is excellent. I hope that Savoy votes no when it’s time. The recent hearing was not a hearing like any I have ever attended. It was a disservice to the community. There were very knowledgeable people in the room who could have debunked what the developer’s representative was saying, but they were shut down if the Selectman didn’t want to hear what they were saying. Those who are concerned have every reason to be. Please reach out to others who have been down this road. We are willing to help. I have seen big projects with big money and special permits in place that were defeated. Please don’t give up.   Janet Sinclair
  • The Massachusetts DEP regulates community noise by its Noise Policy: DAQC Policy 90-00 1. The DEP policy limits source sound levels to a 10-dBA increase above the ambient measured noise level (L90) at the Project property line and at the nearest residences. The Savoy noise study conducted years ago reports the nighttime residual background (Ambient L90 dBA) measurements ranged from 43 to 50 dBA on page 6. These are not worst case conditions. Post construction sound tests in Falmouth and Hoosac found violations at ambient sound levels less than 30 dBA. Similar violations are bound to occur in Savoy.

The primary source of ambient sound in rural environments is ground level wind. Wind Shear is a common meteorological condition whereby hub-height wind (400+ feet above ground) is strong enough to generate rated power and noise, while ground level wind is relatively calm, generating little to no ambient sound. This and other issues were submitted to Massdep at WNTAG.

http://www.cbuilding.org/sites/default/files/WNTAG_Comment_3_7_2014.pdf

There is little doubt that the sound study on which the original permit was issued is in error. The increase in the size of the wind turbines will increase the frequency and magnitude of noise violations of the Massdep noise policy and regulation.   Chris Kapsambelis

In reply to Chris Kapsambelis:

Chris, Thank you for your comment and scholarly reference. The broad area west of the proposed turbines, sandwiched between Borden Mountain and West Hill, is kind of a bowl, especially the populated areas near Black Brook, and Brown Brook with elevations between 1600 and 1700 feet. As a result, those of us who live here do not get cell coverage from the tower in Drury and often find situations where the air is perfectly still – with brisk winds aloft. Without highways or air conditioners the Brier depression must be one of the quietest locations in the state! We hear every vibration of the owl’s call, every deer snort, coyote howl, and stray sound with perfect clarity. I too question the accuracy of the earlier sound study. Without an independent evaluation comparing accurate background sound with noise from turbines and blades that have not even been specified, how can voters possibly assess the expected noise they will be subject to?     Admin

  • Allowing this project to proceed would be a travesty for many reasons. Allow me to add to the excellent information and illuminating photographs in this post, which are the tip of the iceberg:
    One 3MW Wind Turbine Requires (Imagine what the monsters proposed for Savoy require):
    335 tons of steel
    4.7 tons of copper
    1,200 tons of concrete (cement and aggregates)
    3 tons of aluminum
    2 tons of rare earth elements
    Aluminum
    Zinc
    Molybdenum

All must be mined, transported, and/or manufactured. All are a diminshing resource.

May I respectfully suggest that those intereted and concerned consider reading:

Green Illusions; The Dirty Secrets of Clean Energy and the Future of Environmentalism by Ozie Zehner, scholor and researcher.

Techno-Fix; Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment by Michael & Joyce Heussman.

I am also able to provide a document, as an attachment, via email that lists 18 reasons why industrial wind trbines are not a benign nor sustainable alternitive to the fossil fuels we must leave in the ground.   Deborah Andrew

 

If you would like to comment on this story please share your thoughts at the bottom of the About page.

.